Paladin's DR - Isn't it backwards?

[JoeJ]

Is there some reason I'm not seeing why a high level paladin's DR is /evil? I should think that if it's going to be limited it should be the exact opposite and ONLY protect against evil attackers.

The same applies even more strongly to good-aligned outsiders; if their DR has any limitations, /evil should not be among them. OTOH, keeping the /good limitation on DR for evil outsiders works very well with the widespread motif in heroic fantasy that the champions of good are more powerful, but far less numerous, than the champions of evil.

[Scavion]

Joe Jefferson wrote:

Is there some reason I'm not seeing why a high level paladin's DR is /evil? I should think that if it's going to be limited it should be the exact opposite and ONLY protect against evil attackers.

The same applies even more strongly to good-aligned outsiders; if their DR has any limitations, /evil should not be among them. OTOH, keeping the /good limitation on DR for evil outsiders works very well with the widespread motif in heroic fantasy that the champions of good are more powerful, but far less numerous, than the champions of evil.

Yeah its odd.

Just think of it as being SO GOOD only pure evil can penetrate your skin now. Petty evil or evil lacking powerful evil weapons or an evil subtype doesn't work.

[MrSin]

Its to keep out the neutrals. You know what evil is capable of, and you know what your friends are capable of, but what of the neutrals? They could be on any side, at any moments! Or perfectly neutral...

[Scavion]

MrSin wrote:

Its to keep out the neutrals. You know what evil is capable of, and you know what your friends are capable of, but what of the neutrals? They could be on any side, at any moments! Or perfectly neutral...

Damn them and their neutrality.

They're really enemies of everyone.

[RJGrady]

Acquiring the evil descriptor means something is so evil it's a super-power. A vampire doesn't have evil-aligned attacks, by default; an evil attack is more evil than an evil vampire.

[swoosh]

The idea sort of is is that they have this powerful holy/unholy/anarchic/axiomatic aura of power surrounding them that defends them and only their opposite can penetrate it. It's why devils have dr/chaotic and demons have dr/lawful for that matter too.

Aura of law can only be broken by pure chaos, aura of good can only be broken by pure evil, etc. etc. Seems straight forward.

Quote:

OTOH, keeping the /good limitation on DR for evil outsiders works very well with the widespread motif in heroic fantasy that the champions of good are more powerful, but far less numerous, than the champions of evil.

If they wanted that they'd just actually make good stronger, no? Though the game pathfinder is based on doesn't use that trope for its setting.

[MrSin]

RJGrady wrote:

Acquiring the evil descriptor means something is so evil it's a super-power.

Well that, or they're an evil aligned outsider, which is why its awkward your DR is vulnerable against the thing your supposed to be fighting. Evil outsiders have the same gig, great for fighting neutrals and evil, but good outsiders pretty much ignore it. I guess logically your DR would be penetrated by the guys most likely to kill you, but the flipside is that you should really be most prepared against the guys you fight on the day to day instead of making them the one thing you exclude from your defense.

Of course players don't usually get aligned DR anyway.

[MrSin]

Scavion wrote:

They're really enemies of everyone.

And no one...

[LazarX]

MrSin wrote:

RJGrady wrote:

Acquiring the evil descriptor means something is so evil it's a super-power.

Well that, or they're an evil aligned outsider, which is why its awkward your DR is vulnerable against the thing your supposed to be fighting. Evil outsiders have the same gig, great for fighting neutrals and evil, but good outsiders pretty much ignore it. I guess logically your DR would be penetrated by the guys most likely to kill you, but the flipside is that you should really be most prepared against the guys you fight on the day to day instead of making them the one thing you exclude from your defense.

Of course players don't usually get aligned DR anyway.

Paladins model celestials, which also have DR/evil.

Yes, evil is supposed to be what you're fighting. but it goes both ways.... it's also what's supposed to be FIGHTING YOU.

[Peet]

"What could make a man turn neutral?!?"

[Rathendar]

Peet wrote:

"What could make a man turn neutral?!?"

...<_<

....>_>

........apathy?

[RJGrady]

MrSin wrote:

RJGrady wrote:

Acquiring the evil descriptor means something is so evil it's a super-power.

Well that, or they're an evil aligned outsider, which is why its awkward your DR is vulnerable against the thing your supposed to be fighting.

You are well-equipped for fighting evil humanoids. Evil outsiders are supposed to be fighting you.

[chaoseffect]

MrSin wrote:

Scavion wrote:

They're really enemies of everyone.

And no one...

At least they aren't mentally impaired neutral: "Oh hai gaiz don't mind me just bein on your side until you start winning and then I'll switch so its fair :D"

That's literally how I imagine the conversation going. And then the Paladin stabs him in the face because it is the moral and responsible thing to do and his god is cool with it because seriously, screw "actively neutral" people.

[FuelDrop]

Zapp Brannigan: I hate these filthy Neutrals, Kiff! With enemies, you know where you stand, but with neutrals? Who knows. It sickens me. [...] What makes a man turn Neutral? Lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?!

[Jaelithe]

For Pathfinder, it makes perfect sense, since the game's paradigm posits something of an equal and opposite relationship between good and evil that makes them particularly efficacious against and vulnerable to each other.

If, on the other hand, you're playing, say, a quasi-historical game, employing real-world religion and acknowledging the validity of the Abrahamic faiths, you'd go with DR against evil only, since YHWH/God/Allah is omnipotent and evil limited in strength.

Theologically speaking, it depends on whether you interpret evil as a palpable, measurable, "dark" force (as they do in PF) or an absence of good.

Frankly, I prefer paladins radiating Protection from Evil, as they did in 1st Edition. Thus, in my campaigns, they do.

[Artanthos]

Joe Jefferson wrote:

Is there some reason I'm not seeing why a high level paladin's DR is /evil? I should think that if it's going to be limited it should be the exact opposite and ONLY protect against evil attackers.

We could go with your suggestion and change the DR of paladins and good aligned outsiders to /good.

We should also change the DR of evil aligned outsiders to /evil, making them resistant to paladins.

[Charlie Brooks]

Artanthos wrote:

We could go with your suggestion and change the DR of paladins and good aligned outsiders to /good.

We should also change the DR of evil aligned outsiders to /evil, making them resistant to paladins.

That would kind of drift away from the fantasy trope of needing a weapon of pure holy goodness to penetrate the hide of the vile demon, or of having a weapon so inherently vile that it is capable of bypassing the holy warrior's protections.

Not that such a situation is necessarily bad in some campaigns, but that would be a result.

[MrSin]

Charlie Brooks wrote:

Artanthos wrote:

We could go with your suggestion and change the DR of paladins and good aligned outsiders to /good.

We should also change the DR of evil aligned outsiders to /evil, making them resistant to paladins.

That would kind of drift away from the fantasy trope of needing a weapon of pure holy goodness to penetrate the hide of the vile demon, or of having a weapon so inherently vile that it is capable of bypassing the holy warrior's protections.

Not that such a situation is necessarily bad in some campaigns, but that would be a result.

Actually, paladin's are the only class that has an outright "I bypass all DR!" ability if I remember right, and magic weapons bypass aligned DR at +5, so it the trope is still hanging around.

[Samy]

Super-evil guy can only be hurt by super-good sword. Standard fantasy trope.

This is that in goose/gander mode. The reverse works just as well. Makes perfect sense to me.

[JoeJ]

From what I'm reading here, it doesn't look like there's any meta-game balance issues involved, which is what I thought. I shouldn't have any problems changing the DR to /non-evil.

The DR of outsiders already isn't much of an issue. I don't allow evil PCs (I don't want the competition), so they won't be spending a lot of time fighting celestials. And in any case, ever since 1st edition AD&D, I've always treated the various Monster Manual/Compendium/Bestiary entries as suggestions.

In the larger picture, the idea that good and evil have to be, not just in balance but exact reciprocals of one another seems to me to turn them into just Team Green vs. Team Purple. Story wise, I've always found it much less satisfying when good and evil just look like mirror images of one another. The few powerful defenders of good against the multitudes of evil feels much more mythic to me. (The other way around would work too, having to organize an entire army to face a powerful demon lord, but that way offers fewer opportunities for PC heroes to really shine.)

[swoosh]

]quote]Story wise, I've always found it much less satisfying when good and evil just look like mirror images of one another

I'm not really sure how them having similar DR mechanics turns them into mirror images of each other.

"Powerful defenders of good vs Evil Hordes" is encapsulated by having the CR of good aligned outsiders of similar standing be higher.

Giving angels dr/good also promotes this idea of backstabbiness that I find uncomfortable when thinking about the forces of good.

[MrSin]

swoosh wrote:

Giving angels dr/good also promotes this idea of backstabbiness that I find uncomfortable when thinking about the forces of good.

Or does it produce trust in others?

[JoeJ]

swoosh wrote:

I'm not really sure how them having similar DR mechanics turns them into mirror images of each other

Fiends have DR /good, so celestials automatically have DR /evil. That seems like a mirror image to me.

swoosh wrote:

Giving angels dr/good also promotes this idea of backstabbiness that I find uncomfortable when thinking about the forces of good.

I would actually give angels DR /- and fiends DR /good. But if a character is attacking a celestial (or anything else) for no other reason than because it's vulnerable, they're going to lost their good aura before the first blow even falls.

Of course, all of this assumes that the standard type of world where the good/evil axis is much more important than the law/chaos axis. If you're playing in the kind of world where paladins commonly team up with devils to fight those nasty chaotic azatas, things will obviously be a bit different.

[swoosh]

JoeJ wrote:

Fiends have DR /good, so celestials automatically have DR /evil. That seems like a mirror image to me.

Admittedly that is a bit of a mirror image (but when you look at it that way there are lots of mirror images), but I don't think that changes the theory anymore. An aura of goodness only pierced by the blackest evil seems... sensible in that way. The power is utterly anathema to their very being after all.

Quote:

I would actually give angels DR /- and fiends DR /good. But if a character is attacking a celestial (or anything else) for no other reason than because it's vulnerable, they're going to lost their good aura before the first blow even falls.

DR/- makes more sense, though incidentally an evil or neutral 'hero' could wield a holy weapon (just with a negative level until he drops the weapon for the former).

Quote:

Of course, all of this assumes that the standard type of world where the good/evil axis is much more important than the law/chaos axis. If you're playing in the kind of world where paladins commonly team up with devils to fight those nasty chaotic azatas, things will obviously be a bit different.

Fun fact, in 3.5 (shaky on golarion's planes, but pathfinder is built on the same system, including for fiend stats) the devils and demons were locked in an eternal war with each other over order and chaos... Though the situation wasn't any better on that spectrum either: Devils had DR/chaos and demons had dr/law.

[RJGrady]

A wound delivered by a cursed fiend or weapon is a classic trope. Think about the Morgul blades in LOTR. I think some of the disconnect for some people might be in comparing paladins to classic Christian martyr stories; in those, good does always triumph over evil, sometimes with just a prayer.

[Rob Godfrey]

MrSin wrote:

Charlie Brooks wrote:

Artanthos wrote:

We could go with your suggestion and change the DR of paladins and good aligned outsiders to /good.

We should also change the DR of evil aligned outsiders to /evil, making them resistant to paladins.

That would kind of drift away from the fantasy trope of needing a weapon of pure holy goodness to penetrate the hide of the vile demon, or of having a weapon so inherently vile that it is capable of bypassing the holy warrior's protections.

Not that such a situation is necessarily bad in some campaigns, but that would be a result.

Actually, paladin's are the only class that has an outright "I bypass all DR!" ability if I remember right, and magic weapons bypass aligned DR at +5, so it the trope is still hanging around.

Inquisitors can, with exploit weakness.

[Kazaan]

Basically, if you're up against anything other than a creature with Evil attacks, you're better on the defense. Non-Evil attacks will ping off your DR/evil. By contrast, if you're up against Evil attacks, your defenses are curtailed so you must rely on a good offense, leveraging your Smites to kill them before they kill you.

[FuelDrop]

Could be wrong but doesn't smite evil give a buff to AC? In that case, you get DR against attacks by non-evil stuff and better AC against evil stuff.

[Kain Darkwind]

swoosh wrote:

Fun fact, in 3.5 (shaky on golarion's planes, but pathfinder is built on the same system, including for fiend stats) the devils and demons were locked in an eternal war with each other over order and chaos... Though the situation wasn't any better on that spectrum either: Devils had DR/chaos and demons had dr/law.

Another fun fact, this isn't true. They had DR/good. Devils sometimes had 'and/or silver' and demons sometimes had 'and/or cold iron' in addition to the DR/good.

[swoosh]

Kain Darkwind wrote:

swoosh wrote:

Fun fact, in 3.5 (shaky on golarion's planes, but pathfinder is built on the same system, including for fiend stats) the devils and demons were locked in an eternal war with each other over order and chaos... Though the situation wasn't any better on that spectrum either: Devils had DR/chaos and demons had dr/law.

Another fun fact, this isn't true. They had DR/good. Devils sometimes had 'and/or silver' and demons sometimes had 'and/or cold iron' in addition to the DR/good.

Yeah my mistake, was thinking of the wrong creature there.

[MattR1986]

Because evil will always triumph..because good is dumb.

It makes sense as opposing things: fire vs. cold, good vs. evil. It tells you that good is not more powerful than evil as they can hurt you and you them.

[Athaleon]

I like to think the Good and Evil gods are in a constant arms race, improving their agents' DR and ability to pierce the DR of enemy agents.

[MrSin]

Athaleon wrote:

I like to think the Good and Evil gods are in a constant arms race, improving their agents' DR and ability to pierce the DR of enemy agents.

Angel 1: "Guys... I just realized, why don't we just turn our DR/evil, into DR/Good, then they won't bypass our DR anymore!"

Angel 2: "Pfft, crazy talk. It'll never catch on!"

[JoeJ]

swoosh wrote:

DR/- makes more sense, though incidentally an evil or neutral 'hero' could wield a holy weapon (just with a negative level until he drops the weapon for the former).

If evil or even neutral characters using holy weapons to betray their angelic allies happens often enough to be a problem, you've got a VERY strange campaign.

[EvilPaladin]

MrSin wrote:

Its to keep out the neutrals. You know what evil is capable of, and you know what your friends are capable of, but what of the neutrals? They could be on any side, at any moments! Or perfectly neutral...

"Me, I'm evil, and you can always trust an Evil man to be evil. Honestly its the neutral ones you gotta watch out for, 'cause you can never predict if they are going to do something incredibly stupid."

[Captain Wacky]

Peet wrote:

"What could make a man turn neutral?!?"

"Lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?"